Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘Nader’

Despite our phone calls, emails and letters, and despite the fact that most of them are up for reelection next year, the House passed the bailout of Wall Street totaling $850 Billion. If you are not enraged, then you should be. We still haven’t heard where this money is going to come from, could be Russia, could be China, it could be outright issued by  the FED; none of these are good options.

Remember what our founding father, Ben Franklin, said about debt in regards to war, “you’ll get the bill after the war is over.” That being said, we still haven’t received the bill for the $3 Trillion criminal war that King George II got us into. As Nobel Laureate Stiglitz expressed on Democracy Now! yesterday “the Fed engineered a bubble … the housing bubble facilitated people taking money out of their mortgages; … in one year, there were more than $900 billion of mortgage equity withdrawals. And so, we had a consumption boom that was so strong that even though we were spending so much money abroad, we could keep the economy going.”  Thus our plan to pay for the expenses during the war has failed and resulted in $850 Billion in losses, meanwhile the war which is the reason for this crisis has yet to be paid. [ Of course we are still there and it costs $12 Billion a month. And no matter whether it’s Obama or McCain in January, we’re not leaving anytime soon.]

While watching the House give their speeches about whether they favored the Senate’s changes to the bill, I noticed that a lot of them spoke as though this would be their last vote. Some of their term limits have expired, while quite possibly, some of them may have believed that they wouldn’t be voted into Congress again.

When I look at the rationality behind voting for this terrible piece of legislation, I think about the telecom immunity bill that was passed earlier this year. The Bush administration told them to spy and the Bush administration decreed that the corporations shouldn’t be held accountable for their decisions. Congress went along with it and passed the immunity bill. I’m convinced that the same thing has happened here,  the opinion of Congress was that it was the government who created this housing bubble, thus it should be the government who takes the fall. Wall Street was only operating under the framework set forth by the government.

Regardless whether my sentiments are correct, this is what Congress’s vote means: we the people are taking the responsibility for the failures on Wall Street. Our government set it up. Wall Street obeyed. Knowingly Paulson playing the role of the double agent in this game, Chairman of Goldman Sacs and Secretary of the Treasury, knew how it all would end. Thus this bailout was planned. Does it surprise you that it arrives on the last day before congress adjourns for the 2008 elections?

What we have is a case of the greater evil bailing lout out the lesser evil and the people suffer as a result. We needed that bill to fail and these crooks along with it. That is a reminiscent of the 2008 Election, where many voters are suckered into voting for the lesser of two evils; or as presidential candidate Chuck Baldwin said “the evil of two lessers.” The four 3rd party presidential candidates ( that are capable of winning the election) were aligned with the majority of Americans and against this bailout from the start.  Independent candidate Ralph Nader asked the most important question, “Is a bailout even needed?” But we don’t hear their voices on the debates now do we?

Opposition was nullified.  A debate wasn’t wanted. The bill has passed. Now Congress is adjourned.

As a Side Note:

We need to get these debates open. We need to get the people’s voices heard. The door keeps slamming on us, when will we kick it down?
Here is what we can do: Go to ThirdPartyTicket.com and pledge your support. We need to get a lot of support for this video (and others like it) on YouTube.com: http://breakthematrix.com/BreakTheMatrix/Why-not-include-them

Advertisements

Read Full Post »

My fellow Americans,

This election year is one of the most important in history. We have 2 wars that are costing us trillions, warrant-less spying powers granted to our executive branch, and an economy in turmoil. The housing bubble has burst and its devastation is starting to take effect. Our government wants to take $700 billion of debt (on top of the $900 billion we’ve spent thus far) and absorb it, putting those bad loans on the backs of us: the people, the taxpayers. When we add up all the problems, systemic torture, wars of aggression, over 3 trillion dollars of debt, increasing foreclosures and our constitution being ignored and trampled upon, it gets to be so much that we are overwhelmed. Finally though, we arrive to two questions: What can we do about all these issues?  Will anything we do even matter?

I will handle the latter question first as it is the most pressing. (If not the most pressing question in all of existence) It may be true that there are over 300 million people in our country and counting, but we are by-no-means thereby meaningless. We can argue till our bodies no longer hold life whether human life holds meaning or not, though in the end we will never achieve any lucidity. This is because truth is purely subjective. What I mean to say is this: there are certain choices in life that need to be made despite a lack of evidence. We call this believing. To elaborate my point and show how it provides clarity over the answer to our question, I will call upon the question of God. There is no evidence that God exists and thus no evidence that he doesn’t, hitherto whether we believe in God or not, we still believe. The same is to be said about whether human life has any meaning: there is no evidence for either side of the argument; we are forced to believe. Reminiscent to Socratic dialog, it is up to the individual whether life holds any meaning. To this I say: if you are inevitably going to believe, then believe in yourself.

Let us assume that our lives hold meaning. Now we are brought to the former question: what can we do? I say: inform yourself by reading the news and watching the only good news program in the States: Democracy Now. Additionally, I urge everyone to think for themselves this election year and see beyond the two parties that control our socio-political lives. Speak to people. Inform others. Use the internet for activism. Share your ideas. Assemble. Take to the streets.

Speaking more plainly, we can also do this: call Congress’ main switchboard number at 202.224.3121. Ask for your member of Congress. If the main switchboard number is jammed, you can Google your member’s name and find a direct dial phone number. Tell the person who answers the phone to please take a message for your elected representative. Tell them to vote no on the bailout.

If you are convinced that the political sphere has no affect on your life, then understand this: we are a joke in the eyes of the rest of the world because of our lack of engagement in politics and our ignorance of the news. And I’m not just talking about Germany but all of Europe, Russia, and the Middle East. I encounter people from all over this world on a regular basis and I often hear their complaints. The few people that remain and become my friends always ask me, why aren’t Americans more organized; why do we allow our government to play us for fools? I tell them of country torn apart and confused. I tell them of 48 states that span 3,000 miles of land; of states that are the size of their entire country. I tell them of media system that keeps people in dark, till the truth is so far from them that they don’t even bother with looking for it anymore. I speak of two parties that dominate our political sphere and the corporate greed that in turn dominates them. I speak of a country where the power of the consumer has replaced the power of the citizen.  Where a simulacrum is preferred to the reality; where ignorance is preferred to awareness.

Question all Coercion,
JohnofSilence

Read Full Post »

One more bank down. Washington Mutual fell today and was bought out by JP Morgan Chase. This means, in effect, that the debts and bad loans of a speculative investment firm have been merged into a commercial bank. This cannot be good. When we look back at one of the causes of the great depression, the investment firms and the commercial banks were allowed to merge. When you combine a high risk investment firm with a commercial bank it is inevitable for there to be problems without any government oversight. The first thing FDR did to get us out of a depression was to separate the two types of banks from each other and pass legislation stating that they were not allowed to merge anymore. Then he insured the commercial banks and told the investment banks that they were going to be on their own.  The Glass Stegall Act was created to oversee the investment firms and make sure that they were not gambling and taking impossible risks.

In 1999 under President Clinton the Glass Stegall Act was repealed.  The advice to remove this Act came from Barack Obama’s campaign advisor and then Secretary of the Treasury Robert Rubin.  I bring up this point to remind Democrats that they are not free from fault in this crisis and that it was under a democratic
president where the problem got out of hand.

Now we are seeing these investment firms falling and being bought out by commercial banks. It is only a matter of time before the bad loans catch up to them and they fall to. When Bank of America and JP Morgan Chase come crashing down, it will be Main street that will be in trouble. The government buy out of these bad debts will just put the burden on the tax payer. Should this bail-out occur there needs to be more oversight, complete transparency, equity for the government, and penalties for the banks that participate.

I recommend everyone to check Ron Paul and Ralph Nader on what they advise should be done about this crisis. Here are some videos that are worth watching.

Ron Paul:

Ralph Nader:

With these great opinions on what could be done to save our economy, how come Ralph Nader isn’t going to debate. Nader is on 45 States ballots. He’s a write in for all the other states but one, Oklahoma where you can’t write someone in. He is polling 9% in most polls.

How about Bob Barr a libertarian, America’s oldest third party. Those that are worried about Nader “taking away votes” should consider demanding that Bob Barr be included in the debates.  He is also on 45 State ballots and is polling well without any media coverage.

Here is what you can do to get these guys on the debates:

– AT&T (Main corporate sponsor of the first debate) 210-821-4105
Jim Lehrer (Moderator for First Debate) 703-998-2138
Commission on Presidential Debates 202-872-1020

– Call Barack Obama at 866-675-2008.
Hit 6 to speak with a campaign volunteer.

– Call John McCain at (703) 418-2008.
Hit 2 or 3 to speak with a campaign volunteer,
6 to leave a message in the general campaign voice mailbox.

– Email the executive director of the Commission on Presidential Debates.
E-mail Janet Brown jb@debates.org,


Read Full Post »

Okay, time for action. The first Presidential debate is Friday. And we’re getting stonewalled. They won’t let Ralph Nader, Bob Barr, Mckinney, or Baldwin into the Presidential debates. So, here’s what we’re going to do. It’s a two step process.

Step one — call Barack Obama. Tell Obama he should demand that Ralph Nader (If you are for Bob Barr then you could replace Nader’s name with Barr’s in every instance of the script.) be included in the debates. And step two — e-mail the Commission on Presidential Debates. And let them know you are onto their game.

Here are the details.

Step one:

Call Barack Obama at 866-675-2008.
Hit 6 to speak with a campaign volunteer.
Once connected, politely deliver the following message:

Hi, my name is …

I was wondering if Senator Obama, being a believer in equal opportunity and equal rights, could insist that Ralph Nader and other ballot qualified third party candidates be included in the upcoming Presidential debates?

After all, Nader is on 45 state ballots.

And he’s polling well nationwide. And he could help Senator Obama challenge the corporate Republicans.

True, Ralph would critique Senator Obama for his corporate ties also. But isn’t that what democracy is about? Could you please leave this message for the campaign manager? Thank you.

Step two:

E-mail Janet Brown, the executive director of the Commission on Presidential Debates.

Here’s a sample e-mail:

Dear Janet Brown:

Greetings. You must be busy. Preparing for the first Presidential debate this Friday. So, I won’t take much of your time. Just wanted to let you know that the American people were not born yesterday. We know the deal. Take that little private corporation that you run. Controlled by the two corporate parties. And funded by big business. For the purpose of excluding independent minded candidates. Friday, two Wall Street candidates are scheduled to be in the ring. Barack Obama and John McCain. The one candidate who represents the American people, Main Street, if you will, will be on the outside looking in. So, here’s a simple request.
Drop your exclusionary restrictions. And let Ralph Nader into the debates. It will be good for your conscience. Good for the American people. (I believe it was The League of Women Voters that called your corporatized debates “campaign-trail charades devoid of substance, spontaneity, and honest answers to tough questions.”) And good for democracy. Let the American people have a real debate for once. Main Street vs. Wall Street.

Thank you.

Signed

your name.

Read Full Post »

This is in response to the following article:
http://www.courier-journal.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080920/NEWS01/809200491/1008

I’m an US citizen, who has lived on the East coast and the West coast of our beautiful country. I have also lived in Germany and Spain. I have seen first hand the difference of the health care industry when it is nationalized, how it is in Spain and how it is for the most part in Germany.

Here is the basic concept. Two sectors: private and public. The United States has its health care industry (for the most part) in the private. The sole purpose of the private sector is to make money. In the health care industry this results in adverse effects. It is more profitable for people to remain ill and continue to need medication than it is for the people to get better and no longer need any services. Thus a privatized health care system is counterproductive to the health of the people. There are ways around this. In Germany the private sectors is under strict regulation from the public sector, which ensures that contradictions like the one above don’t exist. In the US we pride ourselves on our free market economy, where the government imposes little to no restrictions on the private sector: allowing more fluidity in the market and increasing trade and commerce. That is all changing now. With the government buy out of Freddie Mae, Fannie Mac, and AIG, these private institutions are effectively now nationalized, thus a part of the public sector. The free market economy that the US was once so proud of is now a thing of the past.

That being expressed, I pose a question:
If were are willing to nationalize the worst of the gamblers and risk takers of the speculative investment firms, whose negligence has brought on a disaster in the market, then why don’t we nationalize the health care industry, an industry which will profit the government and ensure the health of the people?

Listen to Ron Paul; you know he’s a rare breed of a politician. Vote third Party. A vote for Nader is not futile, in fact it has more impact because along with being counted like a vote for the other parties, it also sends a message: no more two party system; we will no longer be slaves to the least worst candidate.

Read Full Post »

Please think wiser about the effects of a third party. In regards to the 2000 election, don’t just add 2 to 48 to beat 49; it doesn’t work that way. Suggesting that a third party is a “spoiler” is just plain political bigotry. We all have the right to run for president so under the same logic either we are all spoilers or none of us are.

Speaking with Marx in mind, the progression of government under capitalism is purely economical. The democrat and the republican parties are corporate parties. Since the corporation was given “personhood” in 1886, (Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad) it achieved the same constitution rights that you and I share. This has corrupted our government beyond any measure, criminal wars, torture, economic depression, the list goes on and on.

To break away from corporate and political slavery, we will need to think and vote different this year. He’s not the president we deserve but he’s the president we need, vote Nader.

votenader.org

Read Full Post »

Addressing two major problems when electing the Independent Presidential Candidate Ralph Nader.

First, Nader will need major media attention to reach a large enough audience to even possibly become electable and second, the problem that occurs when the electability of the more likely candidate is reduced by the independent vote thus causing the less favorable candidate to win. (In this case I assume the scenario would be the democrat losing votes to the independent causing the republican to win.)

There is a trick to getting Nader access to a major audience. He would need to do one of two things, either get authorization from the private company that controls the debates which happens to be owned by the democrat and republican parties or he can appeal to another corporation to sponsor a debate, one that can offer an audience that can’t be turned down, as to insure the acceptance of the major parties. Nader has accomplished the latter, he has managed to convince Google to fight the aforementioned corporation for its monopoly over the debates. Now Google has agreed to hold an open debate live on YouTube that will allow multiple parties to participate, as long as the party has at least 10% in the national poll.  (Which is 5% less than what the Dem & Rep owned debates accept, even thought getting it doesn’t necessary insure acceptance) Nader, by the way, has around 6%. That being said, I do believe that there is a big problem with Nader not having enough media coverage, you can see him expressing it when he says buzz-word-phrases that attract media attention but he’s been able to sway Google to help him with this obstacle.

Concerning the second probelm, a two party system which forces us into voting for a party in fear that the other party would be elected is in itself problematic to the concept of democracy. (Which we hold to be conducted by a series of free elections) Furthermore, in denying the possibility of a third party we are condemning ourselves to the polarizing and monopolizing effects of a two party system. I think that in exposing this flaw common sense logic tells us that a two party system is counter intuitive to a democracy.

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »